Big brain evolution: changes in sapiens skull shape (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, February 18, 2018, 13:05 (977 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Nobody knows why the brain enlarged, and so we propose hypotheses. We DO know that implementation causes modifications now, and so once again it is not unreasonable to propose that implementation caused modifications in the past. You yourself used that argument in relation to complexity and shrinkage, and you now acknowledge that enlargement is a modification.
DAVID: You are equating implementation with enlargement, when the only fact we have is shrinkage. I'll stop with that in my theorizing.

But you don’t stop with that! You propose that your God enlarged the material brain, and only then were pre-sapiens able to think up their new concepts and implement them. And yet in complete contradiction you also hypothesize that the material brain is NOT responsible for thinking up concepts, which are produced by the immaterial self/soul (dualism). And you also ignore the fact that there is no evidence of the brain modifying itself BEFORE implementation of concepts, whereas we know that it does modify itself as a RESULT of implementation, and enlargement is a form of modification.

dhw: …a million years ago brains must have been plastic enough to allow for lots of new neurons.
DAVID: I'm only adding to my theory about God and brain size are facts we know. If an ancient brain wanted to add many neurons and grow in volume it had to tell the skull to enlarge and the Mothers to change their pelvis size. All had to coordinated. Do you now see the reason for design?

I have always seen the reason for design, and do not dispute its logic (though I do dispute the logic of your God needing to design every single innovation, natural wonder etc. individually in order to produce the human brain). Most innovations would require changes elsewhere to accommodate them, and all changes would have been impossible without plasticity. However, none of them support your hypothesis that your God made all the changes BEFORE circumstances required or allowed them, as opposed to their taking place in RESPONSE to the conditions.


DAVID: …I can reach my immaterial s/s/c only through my material brain. My living 'me' is material with active thoughts that are immaterial. My living 'me' has shaped my immaterial personality. I see 'me' as both material and immaterial all the time fully interfaced. The s/s/c becomes independent and function on its own is in death or non -functionality of the brain.

Of course all our material observations and experiences shape our immaterial s/s/c, and we are a mixture of interacting material and immaterial, and the s/s/c depends on the brain for information concerning the material world, but it is the immaterial self/soul that does the THINKING as it processes, analyses, remembers, feels, makes its decisions and issues its instructions. I don’t know what you mean by self/soul/ consciousness “reaching” itself. It IS itself, and if you think its consciousness depends on the brain, you are a materialist. Dualism (= TWO entities) separates s/s/c from body (including brain), although the two interact during physical life.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum